3 votes

USNews: Rand Paul Is No Libertarian

DENVER – These days, it's very Washington-chic to debate Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul's viability as a presidential candidate. But despite what Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie says – and despite the near-constant use of the word by the media – Rand Paul isn't a libertarian.

Rand Paul is against my civil liberties, and those of every woman in America. He believes big government should be making our most private, personal decisions for us. Rand Paul is not only anti-choice, he embraces "personhood," the far end of the extremist spectrum on opposing reproductive rights.

I'm tired of (mostly male) reporters and pundits calling Paul a libertarian because women's civil rights are somehow a second tier issue. If you believe that, perhaps you can have a chat with Ken Buck – or the guy who beat him, Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, who's now head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Read the rest: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/laura-chapin/2013/07/29/...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Last time I checked, Rand

Last time I checked, Rand Paul was still registered republican.

As a woman

I don't see, "women's rights", in the name of, CHOICE, being pro women. I see "Pro-Choice" as "Pro-Death" to women's souls and children. I don't see "women's right", as libertarian. Libertarian is HUMAN RIGHTS. An embryo is HUMAN.

I have NEVER once met any woman (maybe YOU are that woman?) who ever told me, "You know what I dream about? I mean seriously, know what I want more than a new wardrobe or computer, or car, or cruise, or vacation? I want an abortion! God, I can't wait to have an abortion".

"Forget marriage, forget having kids, forget all that BS. An abortion is where it's at! I hope that by the time I'm 30 I have at least 20!" I wish I could have more, because abortion is ALL Woman! It makes me a REAL woman!"

I never heard that.

I think women abort because they don't have a partner who supports them, doesn't want them for long, and especially doesn't want their spawn. I think these are WEAK women who SERVE men. I really do.

Why abort? Most is because the boyfriend doesn't want it, they can't afford it.

What gets me most about abortion is, abortion gets MEN off the hook. He doesn't go through any operation. Most cases the state pays for it (if you can't respect the most innocent of human life, what makes you think your life will be respected?).

I had no aunts growing up, all uncles, a lot of brothers. Grew up listening to what men had to say about women. If you think the male population respects you for having abotions, (and if you told the guy who impregnanted you, they ALL know about it). my brothers would all talk about who was getting abortions.. it's a game. You like being a pawn in a game, thinking sex is all that, you're being had. "She says she's pro-CHOICE, all that means is she screws".

I would suggest that maybe to not be a pawn/toy, you get real, begin to LOVE abortion.. save up for it. be proud of it. Don't call it some fakey "pro-choice" to coverup the truth with a BS name. Call it what it is.. Be an ABORTIONSIST, let everyone know, you're a sperm recptical who gets off getting embryos sucked out and mulalated, because they're worthless to you.. and then wonder why, no good guy comes along in your life.

Libertarians are HUMAN rights.

Susan B. Athony said, "I can tell a granger woman for as for as I can see them from the way they carry themselves, like a man."

HUMAN RIGHTS is where it's at.

Evictionism's take on Abortion

I can support either Ron Paul or Gary Johnson on the issue of Abortion because frankly my own beliefs and feeling on this issue are very ambiguous. That being said I am firmly pro-choice because I believe an unwanted fetus is committing trespass within the mother’s body.

First let me provide some personal background. My mother and sister both had abortions performed upon themselves before Roe vs. Wade was decided. My sister’s abortion was botched nearly resulting in her death, while also leaving her infertile for life. Her infertility was a factor in her first husband leaving her. If my mother had not previously aborted my womb siblings, I would not have been conceived and born myself. Please excuse me if I don’t regard my family members as being murderers or irredeemably evil.

I greatly admire Ron Paul for delivering 4000+ new lives into the world, and if he feels it is wrong for a doctor to help in taking a life, I can respect that. However, I have noted, that on several occasions, he has said he would not have the law interfere with a women’s access to oral abortifacients. Some of his pro-life supporters may be surprised at this. My understanding is that his stance is consistent with his belief that a person owns their own body, and therefore can ingest whatever they want into it. Presumably, this would mean a women can self-induce a miscarriage whenever she chooses during an unwanted pregnancy. Given the obvious risk and discomfort, that such an act would result in, I would prefer that the mother have access to the services of a doctor, or at least a midwife, when engaging in such potentially dangerous acts.

The theory that an unwanted fetus is committing trespass within the mother’s body is explained, in far greater detail, by the referenced discussion by Walter Block, (http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/b...) which he calls evictionism. I would simply note that if I invite you to stay at my residence, I can also ask you to leave. If you then choose to stay, against my wishes, I am fully within my rights to call a police officer to forcibly remove you, even to the extent of killing you, if you threaten violence in order to stay within my residence. My prior voluntary invitation does not imply an absolute right to squat on my property for perpetuity, or even nine months.

I believe Ron Paul’s suggestion that the Federal Congress, by a simple act of legislation, should remove the Federal Government and the Supreme Court jurisdiction over this issue, is the most correct position to take. For questions this vexing, let there be 50 different attempts at a resolution. Criminal law is already almost exclusively a state matter, with the laws on murder, rape, assault, robbery, and such varying from state to state. Abortion should also be handled properly at the state level. Rather than one resolution being imposed upon every state, let each state decide as they will what should be done.

Like so many other political questions, libertarians tend to look to the process of how questions are decided, while most others look only at the intended result. As with Solomon’s splitting of the baby, sometimes resolutions require us not to ask for our entire pound of flesh. It is also a legal truism that, hard cases make bad laws.

The Libertarian Party was, and is, largely pro-choice on the issue of abortion, on the premise that the fetus is committing trespass upon the woman's body if she so chooses to construe it as so.

“So the unborn child is worthy of death for simply coming into existence involuntarily? That's a pretty demented theory.”

No more demented that killing any other trespasser, is it? Would you make it a criminal offense for a women to self induce a miscarriage through the use of an abortifacient?

I invite you to spend a three day weekend with me at my home. After the three days are over, you inform me you will not leave voluntarily. I call an officer of the law to help evict you. You refuse to cooperate. The officer tries to remove you by force. You violently refuse to comply. The officer, regretfully, then kills you in order to enforce the eviction. Even a former renter, who can no longer pay their rent due to involuntarily losing their job and income, can be forcibly removed from their home, despite the hardship this involuntarily causes.

The distinction hangs upon the fact that the unborn child has no voluntary choice in any of this. The implication is that since every act of sexual intercourse may result in the unintended conception of a new and unique life that every act of sexual intercourse is implicitly consenting to conception. There is no room for sport/recreational sex at all here.

To me it is still rather simple. Is an unborn child, life? Yes, of course. Is it human? Yes. Does it have an absolute right to the use of it's mother's womb for nine months? No more than someone invited into my home for a few days, who then wants to squat in my home for nine months instead. This issue gets somewhat difficult for me when the mother is asking for a late term abortion where there is a strong possibility of giving birth to a live infant (by cesarean) without undue risk to the mother's life.

I do find it to be somewhat inconsistent of many Progressives that a woman has total control over her body, in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, while insisting the state can tax her to whatever amount of money the state unilaterally chooses to tax her to pay for welfare to support someone else's illegitimate children.

"The dearest ambition of a slave is not liberty, but to have a slave of his own."
Sir Richard Burton

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe


'I believe an unwanted fetus is committing trespass'

So you believe it is ok to murder a life for the sentence?

The life issue is a cornerstone of peace. The fetus was put there by two people.

Your argument is like inviting someone on your property and then shooting them for trespassing.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Dang Kids!!!! cutting across

Dang Kids!!!! cutting across my lawn! first I told them they could eat my pears, but I just figured out they are violating the my property rights, wheres my freakin 300 win mag rifle!! ;)

That is too funny!

A fetus committing trespass!
Maybe women should put a sign on their cervix stating No Entry Passed this Point. Trespasses will be aborted!
Maybe, what women should do is grow up and learn that if you play with sperm, there are usually consequences.
Also, the risk of breast cancer rockets with abortion, so the Medical Industrial Complex profits from women....again.

We don't call 911!,

We don't call 911!, trespassers will be ABORTED!

If you come in to my home can

If you come in to my home can I evict your body with a machete?, no? what about just your head and let the rest of you stay? THAT is the problem with your argument

WTF? A fetus is a

WTF? A fetus is a trespassing leech? How so? Oh no, it wasn't created by the action of a "woman" and a "man." It created itself out of thin air, crawled up a vagina, and attached itself to a uterus. Why do you think because of abortion you would have no been born? Did you mom somehow create a rip in the space-time continuum and observe both choices and where they lead? I doubt it.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

the author:

Laura K. Chapin is a Democratic communications strategist based in Denver, Colorado, advocating for progressive causes and candidates in the Rocky Mountain West. She has previously worked for Gov. Bill Ritter and before escaping to God's Country, she spent 15 years (and way too many late nights Watching the Floor) in Washington, DC. Follow her on Twitter: @LauraChapin.

That sums that up.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Has Rand Paul ever claimed to

Has Rand Paul ever claimed to be a Libertarian?
This is the same crap we get with Ron Paul.
Just because he espoused some libertarian ideas and,
probably to his detriment, accepted the Libertarian party
nomination once, people stick them with this label.
They are conservative Republicans, people, not Libertarians.
It's not hard to understand and the claims are only made
to diminish their platforms in the eyes of the brainless
sheep in the major parties. If you really want to help
them, support them, but drop this pointless argument.

pro-life libertarian. Rand is

pro-life libertarian. Rand is pretty damn close to me, and after learning the lesson the hard way, killing my first unborn child, I would gladly spend the rest of my life in servitude for him/her.

I hate most women politically, And if it weren't for the good

ones I think we'd be better off taking away their right to vote.

There are those websites: cafemom, thestir, those vapid stupid websites where women read articles by spiritually empty pathetic yuppy urbanites addressing their infinitude of insecurities. But then there's the occasional personality puff piece on a liberal politician. Or a factually void unapologetic take down guns or free markets.

Then there's the identity politics: well, the economy might be bad, but Romney will take away you birth control and make it illegal.

When I have political conversations with most women, they get upset if you use too much logic. And if they present a fact that someone they find credible or like socially told them, and that argument possesses the most minute internal consistency, they are completely astounded if you disagree with it. Don't you think communities should be safe from people waving guns around? But what about reasonable gun laws? Okay, what makes something reasonable or unreasonable? Well, an assault ban is reasonable? Why? Well, who needs an assault weapon, nobody? How do you know? Because it's reasonable (no because barbara walters said it with convincing tone of voice and a the socially approving nods of 30 other women in the room).

Well, there are some ridiculously scuztastic men out there. And god bless the good women.

But my lord, as a man who is semi-intelligent and somewhat politically informed, there is a type of woman out there than can just make me crazy.

I say this all the time

It seems so pompous when a woman says "it's my rite to choose". Unless you were raped your choice begins at being sexually active, it boils down to being responsible from the get go.

Beep beep boop beep... I am a Paulbot... prepare for liberty and prosperity!

"he embraces "personhood,"

"he embraces "personhood," the far end of the extremist spectrum" and that's a bad thing?! may God have mercy on this sick and disgusting nation.

Thats funny.

I commented on that article yesterday.



... since when has a liberal been given the right to define what a libertarian is?

"Hey, Rand is not a libertarian because he doesn't let me kill who I want to"... LOL

We need to get an early start on 2016: Support Rand PAC 2016




This idiot really needs to read Liberty Defined.

If you're a Ron Paul Libertarian, you're Pro Life.

Honestly though, this hit piece from the left is good for our chances in the primary. The word Libertarian scares Blue Haired Republicans. I hate it when the bastards on the right refer to Rand as a Libertarian and try to not do so.

He's smart politically.

"Libertarian" = Scary

"Constitutional Conservative" = 2016 President Elect

Even though they're basically the same thing, one is far more palatable to The GOP base. Both Dr.'s Paul have made it their mission to make Republicans care about liberty. If they can accomplish that goal by not using the word libertarian, I'll take it.

Question: Do Libertarians

Question: Do Libertarians support baby killing? If so then I am not a libertarian either.

scawarren's picture

This one doesn't and I'm

This one doesn't and I'm sorry for your loss :(

It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. – Mark Twain

Thank you. It just doesn't

Thank you. It just doesn't seem right.

Please read my comment below.

as a friend of mine used to say

I support freedom of choice for the unborn

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

I think it all comes down to

I think it all comes down to how much we as a society value human life. I've had 3 miscarriages. My last one was 2 weeks ago. My first doctor visit we saw a heart beat at 5 weeks 6 days. It was alive! But I have a condition that won't allow me to keep my pregnancies viable. We've tried treating it but apparently that was not enough. I can't do it anymore...mourn the loss of my babies.

This stuff makes me angry. I used to say I was pro life for myself but didn't want my choice to affect others. But I have changed that stance because there are way too many other options out there.

People who really understand libertarianism

People who really understand libertarianism know that abortion is one of the very few social issues about which there will always be an internal debate.

Gay marriage? Easy.
Overseas occupation? Simple.
Healthcare mandate? Give us a real challenge, would ya?

Abortion? Now there's a tough one. It's definitely within the "non-aggression" philosophy of libertarianism for people to line up on both sides depending on their personal views. In this case, whose rights do you value more? The mother because she's already a fully functioning member of society? Or the child, because a "potential" human life is still a human life?

When someone equates libertarianism with being pro-choice, it just proves they have a very shallow knowledge of libertarianism.

There really isn't even a debate

As a libertarian you have to respect and protect a baby's rights just as much as the mother's because everyone is equal, right?

Just because the baby can't speak for itself doesn't mean it chooses to die. Otherwise raping the mute or murdering the mentally retarded would be okay since they can't speak up for themselves to say no.

Even entertaining the idea that killing a baby against it's will is okay to a libertarian who views individual liberty and personal choice above all is silliness!


Got one right.


The media loves to talk about

The media loves to talk about abortion, because it's a safe topic for all the cowardly reporters. Their career won't suffer no matter what side they're on, because none of the powerful people give a rat's ass about it. If they value their careers at their current company, they will not touch the real issues that affect the future of the country the most like monetary policy, privacy, government criminals, corporate welfare, taxes and foreign policy.

And when the people see it in the media constantly, they are programmed into thinking it's a real issue.

I am pro-Rand but I wonder

I am pro-Rand but I wonder why he didn't just reintroduce the Sanctity of Life Act? That would return the issue to the states. Legislation that completely outlaws abortion won't be very popular come 2016.

Why should killing babies be

Why should killing babies be the right of the state?

at what point is it a baby?

at what point is it a baby? honest question.